O livro didático de alfabetização na era do letramento: uma análise crítica

Abstract

This research has been developed in the light of an extensive debate over the quality of education in Brazil, primarily motivated by the poor results the country achieved in international exams. Such debate has even led to movements that blame the institutionalization of the Brazilian National Curriculum Parameters (PCNs) for the "general failure" in literacy and call for the return of traditional instruction on how to read and write. In fact, despite the invaluable contribution made by studies that foreground the PCNs, their institutionalization did not ensure the expected improvements in Brazilian education, especially in K-8 traditional literacy . Misinterpretations of the PCNs moved reading instruction away from traditional literacy methodologies to their total exclusion from the debate. This phenomenon, addressed by many researchers (cf. SOARES, 2004; MORAIS, 2006; FRADE, 2003; CARVALHO, 2007), soon reflected on the organization of the new textbooks evaluated and recommended by the Brazilian Ministry of Education and Culture (MEC). These books do not seem to be meeting the needs. Recent studies have revealed practitioners dissatisfaction in relation to such materials and their maintenance of instructional practices aligned with traditional methods (see BRITO et al., 2007; SILVA, 2008, and MORAIS AND ALBUQUERQUE, 2008). Considering that: (a) literacy does not represent an alternative to reading and writing instruction, but a process that goes together with it, complementing and elaborating it (SOARES, 2004); (b) in the Brazilian educational context, textbooks are still key to teaching practice; (c) these materials are evaluated according to strict criteria, aligned with the latest theories, and (d) require the Government s investment of large sums to make them available, this study aimed at critically analyzing one literacy textbook from the Brazilian National Plan of Textbooks (PNLD/2010) L.E.R., Leitura, escrita e reflexão 1º ano, FTD. In doing so, it sought to understand why practitioners have not adhered to the new textbooks. For this purpose, it developed a critical documental analysis, within a qualitative approach, observing the following aspects in the textbook: space devoted to reading instruction; existence of joint work in reading instruction and literacy practices; consistency between the declared theoretical perspective and the activities proposed; and objectivity and clarity of instructions and suggestions given to practitioners. The analysis has shown, among other facts, that the textbook not only devotes a very small space to reading instruction, but also that these activities are not well coordinated with those aimed at literacy instruction, corroborating with previous reviewed studies. This may indicate that the PNLD textbook s evaluation criteria needs revision to cause a better balance between reading instruction and literacy practices, further meeting the practitioner s needs. Future studies should complement this data by collecting teachers views of the analyzed textbook, or even by investigating its effective use by practitioners in the classroom